1434 Liberalism in International Relations --------------------------------------------------------~~--------- from all restraint apart from the requirement that LIBERALISM IN INTERNATIONAL basic civic rights be preserved. Most pertinent, for RELATIONS the'impact of liberalism on foreign affairs, the state is subject to neither the external authority of other This entry presents an overview of recent trends states nor the internal authority of special preroga­ and developments in liberal international relations tives held, for example, by monarchs or military theory-both empirical and normative. An effort bureaucracies over foreign policy. Third, the econ­ is made to highlight the link between contempo­ omy rests on a recognition of the rights of private rary liberal scholarship on international relations property, including the ownership of means of and the thought of classical liberal figures such as production. Property is justified by individual John Locke, Adam Smith, Immanuel Kant, acquisition (e.g., by labor) or by social agreement Giuseppe Mazzini, and John Stuart Mill. The first or social utility. This excludes state socialism or part of the essay introduces key liberal principles state capitalism, but it need not exclude market and ideas and identifies three different traditions socialism or various forms of the mixed economy. of liberal thought on international relations. Fourth, economic decisions are predominantly Thereafter, we discuss classical and contemporary shaped by the forces of supply and demand, theories on the relationship between liberal domestically and internationally, and are free from democracy and international peace, followed by strict control by bureaucracies. an overview of related, recent scholarship on global governance and international cooperation Locke, Smith, and Kant: Three Pillars among democracies. The final part of the essay of Liberal Internationalism briefly discusses two alternative liberal approaches to the ethics of military intervention and shows, in Liberal internationalism consists, at its most funda­ particular, how liberal theorists, while they all mental level, in the attempt to promote. the afore­ share a fundamental attachment to representative mentioned principles and institutions across governance and human rights, can fundamentally national borders and apply variations thereof to differ in their support for coercive regime change. international relations. The classical realists from Thucydides onward described an international state of war that could be mitigated, but not overcome, Basic Liberal Principles and Institutions short of a world Leviathan. The classical liberals, Liberalism resembles a family portrait of principles with important variations, broke with this skeptical and institutions, recognizable by certain character­ tradition and announced the possibility of a state of istics~such as individual freedom, political peace among independent, sovereign states. participation, private property, and equality Contemporary scholarship on liberalism and of opportunity-that all liberal democratic societies, international relations looks back at three distinct by definition, share to some degree. Political theo­ traditions of liberalism, attributable to three groups rists identify liberalism with an essential principle: of theorists: John Locke-the great founder of the importance of the freedom of the individual. modern liberal individualism, who claimed that Above all, this is a belief in the importance of moral states have themselves rights derived from indi­ freedom, of the right to be treated and a duty to vidual rights to life and liberty (political indepen­ treat others as ethical subjects and not as objects or dence) and property (territorial integrity), thereby means only. providing the liberal foundations of international The ideal version of liberalism is marked by a law; Adam Smith, Baron de Montesquieu, and shared commitment to four essential institutions. Joseph Schum peter-brilliant explicators of com­ First, citizens possess juridical equality and other mercialliberalism and what they saw as its natural fundamental civic rights such as freedom of reli­ result, liberal pacifism; and finally, Immanuel Kant gion and the press. Second, the effective sovereigns and Giuseppe Mazzini-liberal republicans who of the state are representative legislatures deriving theorized an internationalism that institutes peace their authority from the consent of the electorate among fellow liberal republics. The liberal repub­ and exercising their representative authority free lican tradition, while incorporating to some degree Liberalism in International Relations 1435 both liberal individualism and commercialliberal­ republican governments would introduce various ism, has exerted the greatest influence on contem­ institutional restraints on foreign policy and porary liberal international relations theory. It ingrain the habit of respect for individual rights. argues that liberal democracy leaves a coherent Of course, we know today that domestic republi­ international legacy on foreign affairs: a separate can restraints do not automatically end war. (If peace. Liberal states are peaceful with each other, they did, liberal states would not be warlike, which but they are also prone to make war on nonliberal is far from the case.) Kant seems to have been well states. aware of this: He pointed out that institutional restraints merely introduce republican caution, or hesitation, in place of monarchical caprice. In line A Separate Peace Among with this intuition, modern democratic liberalism Liberal Democracies does not need to assume either that public opinion The claim that liberal constitutional states behave directly rules foreign policy or that the entire gov­ differently in their foreign relations goes back at ernmental elite is liberal. It can instead assume that least as far as Immanuel Kant and Thomas Paine, the elite typically manages public affairs but that but attempts to demonstrate it empirically are potentially nonliberal members of the elite have more recent. In the 20th century, Clarence Streit reason to doubt that illiberal policies would be (1938) first pointed out the tendency of modern e1ectorally sustained and endorsed by the majority liberal democracies to maintain peace among of the 'democratic public. In other words, liberal themselves, and Dean V. Babst (1972) was the first states fight only for popular, ostensibly liberal pur­ to find statistical support for the hypothesis. Over poses since elites need to be constantly concerned the past 3 decades, scholars have found strong a bout domestic support for the war effort. empirical evidence for the existence of a separate Second, Kant foresaw that liberal republics peace among liberal democracies but not between would progressively establish peace among them­ democracies and nondemocracies. Critiques of the selves by means of the pacific union described in separate-peace proposition have focused largely on his Second Definitive Article of Perpetual Peace. the underlying causal argument, suggesting that Kant probably had in mind a mutual nonaggres­ the interdemocratic peace might be simply a by­ sion pact or perhaps a collective security agree­ product of bipolarity and related strategic alliance ment with a rudimentary court of arbitration. patterns during the Cold War (see, e.g., Henry Complementing the constitutional guarantee of Farber & Joanne Gowa, 1997). caution, international law adds a second source-a Michael Doyle, in his 1997 book Ways of War pledge of peaceful respect. As republics emerge and Peace, argues that two centuries of separate (the first source) and as culture progresses, an peace among liberal democracies cannot be dis­ understanding of the legitimate rights of all citi­ missed as an epiphenomenon, or by-product, of zens and of all republics comes into play; and this, strategic alliances; in fact, stable international alli­ now that caution characterizes policy, sets up the ance patterns among liberal democracies appear to moral foundations for the liberal peace. Corres­ be largely a consequence of shared liberal values pondingly, international law highlights the impor­ and domestic institutions. Doyle develops an origi­ tance of Kantian publicity. Domestically, publicity nal explanation of the separate peace among lib­ helps ensure that the officials of republics act eral democracies based on Kant's essay "Perpetual according to the principles they profess to hold Peace." In Doyle's interpretation, Kant's hypo­ just and the interests of the citizens they claim to thetical peace treaty shows how liberal republics represent. Internationally, free speech and the lead to a dichotomous international politics: peace­ effective communication of accurate conceptions ful relations-a pacific union-among similarly of the political life of foreign peoples are essential liberal states and a state of war between liberals to establish and preserve the understanding on and nonliberals. which the guarantee of respect depends. First, Kant viewed the republic, based on consti­ Kant's categorical imperative of course requires tutionalism and popular representation, as the that all statesmen and liberal republics reject impe­ ideal form of government; he understood that rialism and international aggression on moral 1436 Liberalism in International Relations .~------------------------~ grounds. But liberal republics cannot simply assume these critics, Kant's pacific union, the foedus paci­ reciprocal